Clarence Thomas

Was it scandalous for Justice Clarence Thomas to express his support for Neomi Rao’s nomination to Senators considering whether to vote for her confirmation as a federal appellate judge? Some claim it was. Elie Mystal says: I guess we already know how Thomas would rule on any Rao opinions appealed to him. That’s… not how this is supposed to work. Nonsense. A positive report by a Supreme Court Justice about »

The Democrats’ current attack on Judge Brett Kavanaugh obviously recalls their failed assault on Clarence Thomas, who has gone on to a distinguished career as an intellectual leader of the Supreme Court. Memories fade, and I had forgotten some of what Hans Bader details at Liberty Unyielding. I remember this much: the Thomas hearing was televised and gripped the nation. At the time, most Americans concluded that Anita Hill, who »

I’m gaining weight and running out of popcorn watching the left freak out about the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court to replace Justice Anthony Kennedy. But beyond just the theatrics of the left’s primal screams and desperation tactics it is delightful to see the left begin to reckon with something more fundamental going on, which in one sentence I’ll assert is the growing vindication of the constitutional »

Earlier this week, I responded to an op-ed in which Jay Kaganoff said conservatives should call on Justice Clarence Thomas to resign. I distinguished the Thomas-Anita Hill controversy from recent cases of sex harassment charges against public figures in three ways. First, Thomas categorically denied Hill’s allegations. Second, no one other than Hill testified that Thomas engaged in inappropriate behavior. Third, Hill never accused Thomas of sexual touching or of »

Jay Kaganoff, writing in the Washington Post says: “Fellow conservatives, it’s time to call on Clarence Thomas to resign.” No it isn’t. The controversy over Anita Hill’s allegations against Justice Thomas has nothing material in common with the cases of Al Franken, John Conyers, or Roy Moore. First, Thomas categorically denied Hill’s allegations. Franken admits to some of the allegations against him. Moore admitted, at least initially, that he dated »

Yesterday, I discussed how feminists betrayed feminism by defending Bill Clinton against credible and, in one notorious case admitted, allegations of serious sexual misconduct. These allegations were made just a few years after the Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill controversy had put the issue of sexual harassment front-and-center in the nation’s consciousness. Feminists (except those who knew Thomas personally) believed Hill’s claims. And they argued (just as they do today) that, ordinarily, »

Yesterday, in a post called “The Farce of Bill Clinton’s Reckoning,” I discussed the intellectual dishonesty of the many Democrats and feminists who defended Clinton from highly credible (and in at least one case admitted) charges of sexual misconduct. I rejected the defense to this hypocrisy that, when Clinton’s offenses were “litigated” more than 20 years ago, the problem of sexual harassment wasn’t taken nearly as seriously as it is »

Anyone who would like to get a head start on a certain book that is being published next month (and which you can pre-order now, right here!—hint, hint) can find an excerpt in the new issue of National Affairs under the title “Two Kinds of Originalism.” This is adapted from Chapter 7 of the book, which is sure to sell out (so order early). The complete book chapter is longer »

The National Law Journal has reported allegations that, in 1999, Justice Thomas inappropriately touched a young woman named Moira Smith. The alleged touching occurred at a dinner party at the home of her boss. Supposedly, Thomas groped Smith while she was setting the table. I have three observations about Smith’s allegation. First, she waited 17 years publicly to make it. If something serious occurred, I find it difficult to believe »